GHEWARCHAND LALCHAND JOGANI,MUMBAI vs. AO, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1695/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 July 2026AY 2011-1210 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while disallowing interest on bogus loans was correct, the disallowance of TDS on such interest was not justified. The addition for commission was considered hypothetical and without evidence.

What were the facts?

Following a search action, the assessee admitted to receiving accommodation entries for loans. The Assessing Officer disallowed interest paid on these loans and added a presumed commission. The CIT(A) confirmed these additions.

What were the issues?

Whether interest paid on accommodation loans is allowable as an expenditure and whether commission on such accommodation entries can be added without evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: JUSTICE (RETD.) C. V. BHADANG & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh & Shri Akshay Pawar,ARs
For Respondent: Shri Rajgopal Parthasarathi, Sr. DR
Hearing: 18.06.2026Pronounced: 06.07.2026

आदेश की प्रतितलति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant

P a g e | 10 ITA No. 1695, 1765 &1766/Mum/2026 A.Y. 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Ghewarchand Lalchand Jogani 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, 4. Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यावपि प्रवि //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीलीय अतधकरण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai.

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →